RedSoxFan9 Posted November 9, 2018 Share Posted November 9, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaysWho? Posted November 10, 2018 Author Share Posted November 10, 2018 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairslinger Posted November 10, 2018 Share Posted November 10, 2018 26 minutes ago, SaysWho? said: That joke is like a fine wine. Gotta let it breath for a minute Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 4 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 This is a failure that can be put at the feet of both Obama and Ginsburg herself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CayceG Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 Just now, mclumber1 said: This is a failure that can be put at the feet of both Obama and Ginsburg herself. Because the republicans would TOTALLY have held confirmation hearings for an equally liberal justice nominee and not at all stonewalled it like they did with a moderate centrist like Merrick fucking Garland. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 1 minute ago, CayceG said: Because the republicans would TOTALLY have held confirmation hearings for an equally liberal justice nominee and not at all stonewalled it like they did with a moderate centrist like Merrick fucking Garland. Democrats still controlled the Senate at the start of Obama's second term. Kagan (63-37) and Sotomayor (68-31) got through. And replacing a liberal with a liberal would not have gotten the same pusbhack as replacing a conservative with a moderate--although of course the real problem was McConnell refusing to hold hearings at all. But yes, it's so naive to say that Ginsburg should have stepped down at the start of Obama's second term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 Just now, CayceG said: Because the republicans would TOTALLY have held confirmation hearings for an equally liberal justice nominee and not at all stonewalled it like they did with a moderate centrist like Merrick fucking Garland. 2009 and 2010 called: Democrats had a comfortable majority in the Senate. If the worry was filibuster, consider that the Democrats ended up nuking the rule a few years later to ensure lower court nominees could be confirmed. They should have gone for broke and gotten rid of the filibuster if the GOP tried to block a replacement for Ginsburg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 24 minutes ago, mclumber1 said: 2009 and 2010 called: Democrats had a comfortable majority in the Senate. If the worry was filibuster, consider that the Democrats ended up nuking the rule a few years later to ensure lower court nominees could be confirmed. They should have gone for broke and gotten rid of the filibuster if the GOP tried to block a replacement for Ginsburg. That was back when almost the whole party was stuck in the past. Now most have wisened up to turtle's tricks. Not Chuck though. He's hopelessly stuck in the past Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marioandsonic Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaysWho? Posted January 7, 2019 Author Share Posted January 7, 2019 I'm the same way. I don't get why she didn't step down in 2013 or 2014. Even with a smaller majority than the first two years, they still gained seats in 2012. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris- Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 I give her six weeks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaynay1 Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 I feel she goes down right before the next election. Then it gets interesting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 What if we are in a weekend at Bernies type situation? What if the Supreme Court just never lets the White House that she actually passed away? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 She is just working from home while she recovers from surgery. Papers have confirmed this. No need to panic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spork3245 Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 She’s been on the court for nearly 25 years and has taken less days off than Trump has in 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSoxFan9 Posted January 7, 2019 Share Posted January 7, 2019 Oral arguments are terrible, and she should skip more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSoxFan9 Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaysWho? Posted January 11, 2019 Author Share Posted January 11, 2019 She has no cancer remaining Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 12 minutes ago, SaysWho? said: She has no cancer remaining Translation: The cancer is in remission. It will return, as in most cases of cancer treatment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amazatron Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 Gah, every time this thread gets updated I get nervous something bad has happened. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, mclumber1 said: Translation: The cancer is in remission. It will return, as in most cases of cancer treatment. This is very simplistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairslinger Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 2 minutes ago, Amazatron said: Gah, every time this thread gets updated I get nervous something bad has happened. Every time I see it at the top of the page my stomach sinks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 Just now, Chairslinger said: Every time I see it at the top of the page my stomach sinks. On 1/7/2019 at 8:02 AM, Jason said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSoxFan9 Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 This might be the only situation where acceleration leads to a good outcome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 Just now, RedSoxFan9 said: This might be the only situation where acceleration leads to a good outcome What does that mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSoxFan9 Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 The Supreme Court gets so bad that Democrats have to do something dramatic to fix it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 Even FDR couldn't pack the courts, what's the solution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 7 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Even FDR couldn't pack the courts, what's the solution yeah but that was back when things mattered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSoxFan9 Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 Court packing is worth trying again. Jurisdiction stripping is another option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 On 1/7/2019 at 3:13 PM, RedSoxFan9 said: Oral arguments are terrible, and she should skip more. You can’t vote on cases in which you don’t participate in the oral argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema- Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 18 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Even FDR couldn't pack the courts, what's the solution Except the courts have already been packed. Expanding the size of the court is not synonymous with packing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 7 hours ago, Anathema- said: Except the courts have already been packed. Expanding the size of the court is not synonymous with packing. Yes it is. That is precisely what the court-packing plan was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted January 13, 2019 Share Posted January 13, 2019 3 hours ago, sblfilms said: Yes it is. That is precisely what the court-packing plan was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.